New female law students outnumber males two to one for first time ever

The number of women who have accepted a place to study law this academic year is more than double the number of men who have done the same.

Though the percentage of women studying law has been steadily increasing for years, this is the first time this two-to-one ratio has ever been reached. To break the figures down, of the 26,075 students who accepted a place to study law in 2017 8,510 are men (33%) and 17,565 are women (67%), UCAS data shows.

This vindicates Legal Cheek predictions made last May, when we exclusively reported that the number of applications to study law made by women had risen to more than twice the number of men. We revealed at the time that as of UCAS deadline day last year 130,640 applications were submitted to study law: 87,780 of these were made by women and 42,860 by men.

The percentage of women studying law at UK universities has been slowly eating into the percentage of male counterparts for at least the past decade. Five years ago, the percentage of new female students was 64%, rising to 65% in 2014 and by 2016 the figure was 66%.

The reason for this trend is because more women, as opposed to less men, are applying and then accepting law school places. The number of male acceptances has stayed around the 8,000 mark since 2009, while the number of women has increased by 28%, from 13,725 to 17,565, in that time.

Given the disproportionate number of women being churned through university law schools, it’s perhaps unsurprising this is reflected in the gender balance of young solicitors.

Law Society statistics show that 62% of solicitors admitted to the roll in 2016 are female. Overall, however, Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) research shows male lawyers do still outnumber female lawyers, while the percentage of female partners is only about a third.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

55 Comments

Trumpenkrieg

Anonymous

Trumpenkrieg

I see your way of “fighting misogyny” in the LC comment section is to use a term of disparagement which is also a vulgar word for the female genitalia.

(19)(4)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 1:53pm

It isn’t a vulgar word and by far the most common use of the word these days is to aptly describe individuals such as yourself.

(4)(14)

Ciaran Goggins

Jan 12 2018 3:25pm

Pudenda.

(0)(0)

Corbyn. Symphathiser

Jan 12 2018 2:22pm

Haha, concern trolling from an actual Nazi. Cute.

(5)(7)

Trumpenkrieg

Jan 12 2018 2:54pm

Point me to a single instance where I have advocated for national socialism.

Clue: you can’t

(9)(5)

Corbyn. Symphathiser

Jan 12 2018 3:46pm

Probably because most of your posts get deleted.

Because you’re a Nazi.

(10)(12)

Trumpenkrieg

Jan 12 2018 5:51pm

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(4)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 6:56pm

Foreign things are largely better than British things. Particularly when it comes to people. Our culture is pretty awful.

Corbyn. Sympathiser

Jan 13 2018 12:03am

Of course you’d like to live under Nazi rule. You’re a Nazi.

Trumpenkrieg

Jan 13 2018 9:53am

Go away. Nobody cares about your virtue signalling.

Corbyn. Sympathiser

Jan 13 2018 10:19pm

No.

Granny Grammar

Jan 12 2018 9:52am

“fewer men”,

not

“less men”.

(16)(2)

Trumpenkrieg

Jan 12 2018 10:01am

Correct grammar is a patriarchal construct.

(17)(13)

Ciaran Goggins

Jan 12 2018 3:26pm

More subconscious phallocentric oppression, as I said to Proudperson (cont p.5)

(0)(1)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 9:58am

And this is why gender equality will very soon be achieved in the law. It is why positive discrimination is such a flawed (and discriminatory!) idea.

(16)(7)

Barry Stair

Jan 12 2018 10:00am

As a member of the under-represented gender, who do I complain to?

(20)(7)

Feminazi

Jan 12 2018 10:23am

God the comments in here. Get a fucking clue.

(8)(13)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 10:25am

Mildly interesting.

What would be more useful is figures of graduates, trainees and NQ’s. From starting my degree to completion, a lot of people dropped out or didn’t pursue a legal career. These figures are meaningless if half of those applicants go on to other professions.

(10)(0)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 10:58am

Not a shock. I studied in the mid 00’s and my uni year was around 60% female and that percentage got higher as I went on to the LPC and training contracts. Look at the majority of firms (outside the city granted) and fee earners under the age of 40 are predominantly female.

(5)(0)

Male

Jan 12 2018 11:00am

Now ticking male on the diversity monitoring paperwork finally has some weight. Might get that TC one day

(17)(3)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 11:28am

*Now ticking male on the diversity monitoring paperwork finally has some weight. Might get that TC one day.

(3)(0)

Very amused

Jan 12 2018 11:34am

Agree. If this trend continues it will be a massive advantage to be a male applicant. Firms will be actively seeking male applicants as they will be a rarity.

(4)(0)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 11:19am

“The reason for this trend is because more women, as opposed to less men, are applying and then accepting law school places.”

English, ************, do you speak it?

(6)(0)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 11:24am

Women look nicer than men so it makes sense to me. Remember that just because a woman has her top on it does not make her any less of a woman. It might seem odd to some people but not all older men want to see nipples whilst sipping their latte. If you wouldn’t ask a man to take his clothes off at interview, why would it be acceptable to ask a woman to?

(10)(0)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 11:55am

I disagree. I think a request for a woman to remove just her top and bra at interview is borderline acceptable, of course depending on the exact nature of the role in question. Not more than that though. The exact same can be said for a man. A request to remove clothing from the waist up is acceptable. You could apply the same logic the other way and ask people to take clothes off from the foot upwards until a certain point. That can pose difficulties though and some people are a bit funny about feet.

(20)(1)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 1:58pm

I agree, but it should just be seen as a question, not a demand. Candidates should have the right to say no. However, if the candidate does refuse it can well lead to concerns and suspicion. If she keeps the blouse on how do you know she doesn’t have a grotesque tattoo on her chest?

On the reverse side, if the interviewer wishes to take off clothes then they should ask the candidate first. Same rules should apply regarding the type of nudity permitted.

(6)(5)

Random Friday

Jan 12 2018 4:09pm

Previous comment was really funny, and you decided to ride it to a slow and painful death.

(4)(1)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 4:58pm

I WROTE THE PREVIOUS COMMENT (THE FUNNY ONE)!

Thank you, you made my day by saying something nice about my writing :).

I am going to celebrate tonight with a 4 pack of Stella Artois and the last of my home-made Christmas cake. I might treat myself and consume it all whilst having a lovely warm bath.

(7)(1)

Jones Day Partner

Jan 17 2018 3:22pm

Indeed. It is how we decide our trainee rotations.

(2)(0)

Very amused

Jan 12 2018 11:33am

Clear discrimination against men taking place here by the Matriarchy. Soon there will be quotas so that more men are admitted etc etc.

(8)(3)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 1:25pm

So when the girls outnumber the boys, it’s:

“YAY, YOU GO GIRLS!”

And when the boys outnumber the girls it’s:

“WAH WAH SEXISM WAAAAAH!”

And people wonder why feminism is increasingly seen as a hateful, bigoted supremacy movement.

(24)(4)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 2:06pm

Women are slightly better than men so I think it is okay. Intelligence wise they are about the same, but women look way nicer than men.

(4)(5)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 2:55pm

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(2)(2)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 4:56pm

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 7:04pm

Unfortunately that is likely to lead to upset.

Younger women (18 to 27) are likely to be angered by the level of groping they receive from fee earners. Older women (28+) are likely to be offended that they are not getting the attention that the younger (and better looking) women receive.

Whilst you might think that allowing and encouraging women to go topless will be liberating for them and a success for the #freethenipple movement, it can in fact have side consequences that are not so obvious when first contemplating the idea.

(4)(0)

Ciaran Goggins

Jan 12 2018 3:27pm

I HAVE SUCH A CRUSH ON BARONESS HELENA KENNEDY!

(1)(1)

Anonymous

Jan 12 2018 7:05pm

She is cute. I would definitely delve.

(0)(0)

Sex-crazed lawyer

Jan 13 2018 12:11am

Good news for once. A vagina-wave is coming to our shores.

(2)(0)

Tyrone

Jan 15 2018 10:16am

Beats saggy Linda from accounts

(0)(0)

Stephen N Green

Jan 13 2018 3:45pm

God preserve us. Am I not right in thinking that a higher proportion of women post-degree move straight into areas that focus upon SJW subjects including human rights law, ‘equality’ and so on? Just what we need…

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Jan 13 2018 3:58pm

Does equity count as a “SJW” subject? It *sounds* similar to “equality”, after all…
(On a more serious note though, even if I agreed that women were primarily interested in human rights etc., you do realise this won’t magically generate more TCs and pupillages in those areas, right? So a higher number of women won’t suddenly transform the entire legal landscape – not sure what your problem is.)

(1)(0)

Bryan Scandrett - Men's Rights Brisbane

Jan 13 2018 10:04pm

Already has. Alison Saunders.

(0)(0)

Trumpenkrieg

Jan 13 2018 7:02pm

Women tend to move straight into areas that focus upon the redistribution of other people’s time, money and resources.

(6)(3)

Bryan Scandrett - Men's Rights Brisbane

Jan 13 2018 9:48pm

This is very bad.
The corruption of justice itself, born of puerile female resentment.
Bindalism. As per Julie Bindal.
This is why Alison Saunders exists and hasn’t been removed as unfit for purpose, with her ridiculous and transparently corrupt prosecutions.
Because the purpose has changed from any attempt at justice to criminalizing masculinity as toxic. Shoot first, ask no questions later.
This is why they say the future is female. If it has a penis, it is toxic.
I encountered this as a 15 year old schoolboy visiting University.
Unbridled, unmasked, scapegoating, man hate. Men are being booted out of everything that matters.
Feminism is overt oppression. Feminism gives us emotionalist corruption.
Men make laws to protect women. Hellbent on protecting women.
Women make laws to criminalize masculinity. Hellbent on hurting men.
Despising all that dick.
Just like the global false allegation of #metoo, this is going to end very badly.
Worse than 50 years of no fault divorce, single motherhood, Govt Daddy and the boom in prison business that brought.
Read, income for lawyers.
Destruction of society.
The soft retort is to say I’m envious of female success. I would be more supportive if it was actually helpful. There are too many women who are exactly like that and the rest of you are entirely disinterested in doing a damn thing about it.
Why? Because you know you love it. We all know.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Jan 14 2018 12:36am

You do know that “puerile” comes from the Latin “puer” meaning “boy”, don’t you?

Therefore describing females as “puerile” in this context just displays your breathtaking ignorance.

(3)(1)

Trumpenkrieg

Jan 14 2018 1:51pm

Autistic Post of The Week

(3)(2)

Anonymous

Jan 14 2018 3:11am

Despite the figures for NQs, the smart money says in 10 years women will still only make up just under 50% of what would be considered a senior lawyer, and only 25-30% of large firm partners.

Solutions to this? End the stupid societal pressure to produce children thus no maternity leave is needed and billable targets don’t get interrupted, or find clients dumb enough to let lawyers bill out said mat leave. All those wake ups during the night? 6 minute units would PILE on…

Or be like a few notorious silver circle and international firms who keep sending post-mat leave associates on extended client “secondments”. We get it, you think they should go in house.

(0)(0)

Trumpenkrieg

Jan 14 2018 11:11am

“End the stupid societal pressure to produce children”

Are actually that stupid to think that this is a reasonable statement?

(4)(1)

Corbyn. Sympathiser

Jan 15 2018 12:06am

Get out, Nazi.

(2)(1)

Trumpenkrieg

Jan 15 2018 9:03am

You haven’t cottoned on yet that I don’t consider that an insult?

(0)(3)

Anonymous

Jan 15 2018 12:21pm

Regardless of whether you take it an insult or not, the key point is “get out”. You are an annoying rat. Your comments are not witty or clever, they just come across as immature. You get called the likes of a Nazi and a cunt because of the rubbish you post. If you are doing it just to be a pest then well done. If you think you actually add anything to the comments section then think again. You, unlike “Not Amused” and other controversial posters, are simply a shit stain.